From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: linux-next: block tree build failure Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:25:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20081126112546.GA23544@elte.hu> References: <20081126212920.f992f7a5.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20081126104259.GB6052@elte.hu> <20081126104700.GI26308@kernel.dk> <20081126111621.GA20601@elte.hu> <20081126112310.GA17392@Krystal> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:54188 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750971AbYKZL0I (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Nov 2008 06:26:08 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081126112310.GA17392@Krystal> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Jens Axboe , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo * Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote: > > > > * Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > > > the other direction (you merging ftrace bits) doesnt look too hot, > > > > you'd have to pick up: > > > > > > > > 95 files changed, 5308 insertions(+), 1603 deletions(-) > > > > > > Lets do that, it's just a single patch here from Arnaldo. I have > > > attached it to this email. > > > > thanks, here's the conversion to tracepoints below. Stephen, you might > > want to pick up the blk tree straight away plus the fix below. > > I guess the only difference between your implementation and mine is > that you define all the tracepoints in block/blktrace.c, while I > define them in the various files where they are used. I don't feel > very strongly opinioned about any of the two alternatives. usage site build attribute must be the same as definition site attribute. So blktrace.c is not a good place - we will fail the build in the !CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IO_TRACE case. I'll apply your spread-out definition variant. Ingo